President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[slucero]

You, slucero, and the lot of you assuredly suffer from the Dunning–Kruger effect. It is defined as a cognitive bias in which unskilled people make poor decisions and reach erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to appreciate their mistakes.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/20/the-anosognosics-dilemma-1/

Just to hammer the final nail into your logically felled arguments, oh mighty Republican pseudoscientists, I'll post this for the THIRD TIME.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

This is a compendium of favorite, long-debunked arguments that get used over and over. For each argument there is a page that:
- explains the argument
- explains why it's wrong
- gives references to peer-reviewed articles in credible journals
- gives examples of people using the argument

Done, and done. Owned. The lot of you, like the GOP, have failed epically. Move along.

.. and you suffer from the "Retarded-Liberal" effect.... and in your case its terminal...


and here's why Obama won't be re-elected... Write it in reverse, on your Five-head so you can repeat it every morning as you look at your dome in the mirror wondering how stupid you could have been to believe Keynesian-ism would work... Repeat it so you have it memorized.. (or in your case mesmerized)....


"deficit cutting, in concert with ending massive monetary easing will stall the economy and the markets"


Both Dems and Reps are jockeying trying to cut up to $4 trillion in future deficits, and ANYTIME deficits are cut.. the economy dies.. and this is happening as BO is entering the fight for his second term... So his only re-election hope is QE3, which will happen... and he has to hope (against hope) that any "pop" will coincide with election time and last long enough for him to take credit for it.. but QE2 hasn't worked and neither will QE3.

The benchmark for Obama: contraction (or at least collapsing growth). Which is precisely where we are now.

Done, and done. Owned.

[Seven Wishes2]

First of all, it's already been thoroughly proven the high gas prices are driven by speculators left to their own devices after Bush's massive deregulatory Administration. This is NOT a supply and demand issue.

The solution? Regulate Wall Street like it always was up until Dumbya. Invest in new car technology, mass transit and alternative fuels that reduce our dependence on oil...oh, wait. I forgot...common-sense approaches are never endorsed by the GOP if they don't put even more wads of cash into the already full pockets of the CEO's and Fat Cats.

Slucero, you didn't offer up any facts, ONCE AGAIN. Just more right-wing, parroted, factually void talking points. If all of Bush's economic principles and legislation had been left as it was, you would be selling apples for 10 cents apiece on a street corner right now.

Again, the FACTS:

UNEMPLOYMENT DOUBLED UNDER BUSH - 6 years of whose Administration was supported by a majority in the House and Congress.

WE WENT FROM A BUDGET SURPLUS TO BEING TENS OF TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN DEBT.

BUSH CAUSED - AND PRESIDED OVER - TWO RECESSIONS.


You claiming to have "owned" anything without actually citing a fact, valid resource, or provable idea is laughable...just like you and your sausage tits. Have a nice day. chrome dome.

[S2M]

First of all, it's already been thoroughly proven the high gas prices are driven by speculators left to their own devices after Bush's massive deregulatory Administration. This is NOT a supply and demand issue.

The solution? Regulate Wall Street like it always was up until Dumbya. Invest in new car technology, mass transit and alternative fuels that reduce our dependence on oil...oh, wait. I forgot...common-sense approaches are never endorsed by the GOP if they don't put even more wads of cash into the already full pockets of the CEO's and Fat Cats.

Slucero, you didn't offer up any facts, ONCE AGAIN. Just more right-wing, parroted, factually void talking points. If all of Bush's economic principles and legislation had been left as it was, you would be selling apples for 10 cents apiece on a street corner right now.

Again, the FACTS:

UNEMPLOYMENT DOUBLED UNDER BUSH - 6 years of whose Administration was supported by a majority in the House and Congress.

WE WENT FROM A BUDGET SURPLUS TO BEING TENS OF TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN DEBT.

BUSH CAUSED - AND PRESIDED OVER - TWO RECESSIONS.


You claiming to have "owned" anything without actually citing a fact, valid resource, or provable idea is laughable...just like you and your sausage tits. Have a nice day. chrome dome.

How can something be proven that is totally false? High gas prices aren't driven by the speculators, they are driven by the falling dollar. Gas prices and the dollar are inversely proportionate. Dollar is high, gas prices are low....Dollar is low, gas prices are high. When the dollar ain't going to get you much the arabs want more of it per barrel.

[S2M]

FF, seriously....do you have an original thought in your skullcap? Do you believe everything you read(read: cut & paste)?

You subscribe to the same lame thinking my father said the people had in the 40s, 50s, and 60s....and I quote, 'We didn't realize that smoking was bad for you...doctors didn't know as much back then'....oh really? People didn't realize that INHALING fucking smoke was detrimental to one's health....REALLY? Well what the fuck did they think killed people in a friggin' fire? Smoke gets you WELL before the fire does....that should have been their first fucking clue.

Now onto your train of illogical thought....there is a such thing as global warming. You should know that we are only living in between ice ages anyway. Or did you not find that cut & paste citation when you were trawling for goodies to post for backup....Warming and cooling are natural events, but since the idustrial age began, we've been speeding that process up....I don't need to look up ONE single fucking expert to know that....your thinking process is just like the people of the past...stunted. Ignorant. And in denial. But, as always your agenda is party driven....if Al Gore were a pubbie, you'd be singing a far different tune....you might even have joined his FB page.

[Seven Wishes2]

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Dude, whoever posted that is flying in the face of 99% of the qualified climatologists out there,

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Dude, whoever posted that is flying in the face of 99% of the qualified climatologists out there,

yeah well four out of five dentists recommend sugarless gum. The fifth dentist was the one who was right! ( The commercial was lying)

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

WE WENT FROM A BUDGET SURPLUS TO BEING TENS OF TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN DEBT.




.

you do know that a current account surplus/deficit is something different than accumulated debt dont you?

[Seven Wishes2]

you do know that a current account surplus/deficit is something different than accumulated debt dont you?

Thanks, Skip. Yes.

[Seven Wishes2]

Dude, you must stop. My sides are killing me here and I damn near rolled off my sofa, I'm gonna hurt myself if I keep reading your posts.

Really? The truth must hurt, then. I think you just need more bile-infested grist for your favorite mill.

You vacilate between blissfully ignorant and shotgun-toting, corn-cob pipe smoking, inbred Alabaman-stupid. Dude, WTF? I mean, it's true! The "climategate" scandal was THOROUGHLY debunked OVER A YEAR AGO. You're like the guy who was stood up on a first date by the prom queen, but then goes around telling everyone your freshman year of college that she was your girlfriend.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/science/earth/04climate.html

Here's the oft-repeated pattern: the right erupts with a smattering of false information, the media treats the "controversy" as a legitimate story, and the public hears all about it. We eventually learn that the story was nonsense, but at that point, the media has lost all interest. You know, those got'cha elitist media liberals.

"A new investigation into the 'Climategate' controversy has exonerated U.S. scientists of any wrongdoing. The probe was conducted by the U.S. Commerce Department's inspector general at the request of Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.). In March of 2010, the British House of Commons' Science and Technology committee released the results of their investigation into the scandal, revealing that nothing in the 1,000 emails conflicted with the scientific consensus that "global warming is happening and that it is induced by human activity." They concluded that the scientific reputation of the CRU "remains intact." Another independent investigation released in July similarly cleared the scientists, saying they were honest and their research was reliable."



http://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/reports/2011/001688.html

[Seven Wishes2]

And yet another article without a hint of actual proof or facts - an op-ed piece by the ultra-conservative Journal! Nice try!

[RedWingFan]

9.1

Dude the economy is doing great. Obama and Biden said so themselves!!!

[Seven Wishes2]

Not as well as under Bush, when unemployment more than doubled in eight years, an illegal war was started, the deficit doubled, the rich got richer, the middle class got obliterated, and international relations were at their lowest point since the war in Vietnam - and, of course, six of those eight years featured a Republican President as well as majorities in the House and Senate.

[S2M]

FF, you like pictures, right?

[Rockindeano]

MAY JOBS: +54,000...

MCDONALD'S hired half...



Man, what a bad week to be a liberal. Keep in mind that no President has ever won re-election when unemployment has been over 8%.

Deano, what odds do you give on Barry getting UE under 8% by Nov. 2012? I'm guessing zero chance. To reach that milestone Barry needs to come up with 400,000/500,000 jobs a month for the next 15 months or he and the libs are...

About 20-1 odds FF. However, as bad as things are, I also give the POTUS a 2-1 favourite early morning line to beat his opponent.

The GOP field is so pathetic and weak, he should win rather easily.

[RedWingFan]

and, of course, six of those eight years featured a Republican President as well as majorities in the House and Senate.

What was the unemployment rate for those first 6 years of Republican control? 5%

The stock market as well as business is heavily based on futures. Congress in the hands of Democrats was a dark storm cloud that business and industry saw coming. Some survived some didn't.

The US economy has only been further destroyed by Obama.

His stimulus package really worked wonders huh? Now this is the part where you're supposed to come in and say, if he hadn't passed that it would have been a lot worse.

[Seven Wishes2]

What was the unemployment rate for those first 6 years of Republican control? 5%

The stock market as well as business is heavily based on futures. Congress in the hands of Democrats was a dark storm cloud that business and industry saw coming. Some survived some didn't.

Whatever. Factually void.

But here's Wall Street's strange little irony -- studies show the stock market performs better and tends to be less volatile when Democrats are in power.
This discrepancy was explored recently in a study by two finance professors at the University of California at Los Angeles, Pedro Santa-Clara and Rossen Valkanov.
According to their paper, entitled, "The Presidential Puzzle: Political Cycles and the Stock Market" and published in the October issue of the Journal of Finance, stock market returns are on average about 5 percent higher when the White House is run by a Democrat than during Republican rule.
http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/21/markets/election_demsvreps/

Santa-Clara and Valkanov based their efforts on the average excess return of the indexes over the return of the three-month Treasury bill. The results were striking. When a Republican president held office, the value-weighted return delivered nearly a 2% premium over the T-bill. When a Democrat held office, the premium was nearly 11%. While the 9% difference clearly favors the Democrats, the results from the equal-weighted portfolio were even more telling, with a 16%+ result in favor of the Democrats.
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/financial-theory/08/political-party-democrat-republican-stock-returns.asp

[Seven Wishes2]

And Palin continues to spread lies, fearmonger, and most of all, make herself look like a tool:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/washpost/abushelofpinocchiosforpalin

[Seven Wishes2]

Right! Even though I just laid out proof you're COMPLETELY, 100% full of shit.

Case closed: Bush Jr., worst President since Hoover. Two recessions. Unemployment rate doubled. Massive, unprecedented deficits. Illegal wars. No Bin Laden. Worst period for international relations since the late 19th Century. Stock market swoon.

[RedWingFan]

Right! Even though I just laid out proof you're COMPLETELY, 100% full of shit.

Case closed: Bush Jr., worst President since Hoover. Two recessions. Unemployment rate doubled. Massive, unprecedented deficits. Illegal wars. No Bin Laden. Worst period for international relations since the late 19th Century. Stock market swoon.

Don't forget to include other leftist/Obama slogans as you continue to guzzle the kool aid... "Hope and Change!" and tire gauges are the answer to high fuel prices...among others.

[Seven Wishes2]

Dipshit! I already linked that .gov site to prove MY point! Thanks for doing it for me, though.

The last time I checked, Congress and the House don't propose budgets.

In the past few days I've provided unassailable data that proves the economy performs much better under Democrats; that while the GOP claims to be the party of small government, it actually increased the size of government at better than a 3-to-1 higher ratio than the Democrats have since WWII. "Climategate"? Debunked. Move along, peabrains.

[Seven Wishes2]

And Spinks comes back with a left jab...blocked! Tyson with the hook...Spinks is out cold!!!

Only 10% of all articles in the '70's even referred to the possibility of global cooling. Wrong again! And NONE of those were peer-reviewed! That was just MEDIA articles, not scientific publications.

THE MYTH OF THE 1970S GLOBAL COOLING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS

http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/131047.pdf

[Memorex]

Here's my take. Those who believe in the worst of the ill effects of climate change will undoubtedly not give a fair review, but....

I am 44. I cannot distinguish any change in my lifetime based on weather. I've had long winters and short winters. Long summers and short summers. Rain in June, heat in June. The recent tornado outbreaks are not the worst in record history - you only have to go back to the 50's. There are no more or less instances of hurricanes or typhoons or earthquakes than over the course of millions of years. See those hills in California - those were built by earthquakes over Millions of years. Here in Minnesota where i live now, we are surrounded by beautiful lakes created during the thaw from the last ice age. Sliding glaciers. Recall, our land mass used to be one large chunk until it split off into the continents we know today. Yes, there was (and is) the hole in the ozone issue. There is smog. There is pollution. All of which means we as the human race should strive every year to create better methods of living. We cannot have an attitude that our actions have zero affect.

However, even though I used to be a huge global warming alarmist, I have over the years took a closer look at things, followed the money, looked at both sides and I honestly feel that anyone that truly believes the human race can tilt this planets eco system to the brink of disaster - to all the horrible ways we are going to die - is simply holding a position that they simply don't want to give up. There has been no significant warming in the past 10 or so years, despite bigger cars, more people, more energy consumption, etc.

Again, that doesn't mean the planet itself won't regulate. All things in nature change. This planet has gone through tremendous changes. And if the sea rises, we will move. We may lose cities and islands, but guess what - thousands of years ago those cities and islands were likely under water. I seriously doubt that cavemen built enough fires to create global climate change.

Even at my most zealot, I never believed in the worst of it. I know the sun has far more power than we will ever hold.

Here's my main problem. Anyone with any sense can research for an hour and see there is bias, making the argument more political than it should be. The 99% of scientists figure stated above is complete BS. Many, many scientists (more each day it seems) are backing away from the major claims. Al Gore (who I once respected until he lost his mind) reminds me of an 80's TV evangelist. Could there be a bigger hypocrite? So I am not prepared to pay so much more, and hurt the poor in this country the most, until such time as things are proved (without gimmicks like placing temp readers next to chimneys). I don't need more, heavier regulation on things when there are no viable alternatives offered.

Again, there is seriously nothing different (on average) now than 40 years ago. I remember the droughts when I was young. Growing up in California, we had droughts, then none, then droughts again. Half of the place is a damn desert - has been for a very long time.

[Seven Wishes2]

There is smog. There is pollution. All of which means we as the human race should strive every year to create better methods of living. We cannot have an attitude that our actions have zero affect.

Agreed 100%. We should all be doing what's best.

I have over the years took a closer look at things, followed the money, looked at both sides and I honestly feel that anyone that truly believes the human race can tilt this planets eco system to the brink of disaster - to all the horrible ways we are going to die - is simply holding a position that they simply don't want to give up. There has been no significant warming in the past 10 or so years, despite bigger cars, more people, more energy consumption, etc.

If this is your position, you're simply deliberately ignoring all the facts and data.

Different reports show that, overall, 2005 was hotter than 1998. What's more, globally, the hottest 12-month period ever recorded was from June 2009 to May 2010.

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009JD012105.shtml

Again, that doesn't mean the planet itself won't regulate. All things in nature change. This planet has gone through tremendous changes. And if the sea rises, we will move. We may lose cities and islands, but guess what - thousands of years ago those cities and islands were likely under water. I seriously doubt that cavemen built enough fires to create global climate change.

After remaining relatively steady for the last 650,000 years or more, in just the last two hundred years the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has suddenly shot up from 280, to more than 380 parts per million.

Even at my most zealot, I never believed in the worst of it. I know the sun has far more power than we will ever hold.

Again, this is irrelevant to the climate change trend.

Direct observations find that CO2 is rising sharply due to human activity. Satellite and surface measurements find less energy is escaping to space at CO2 absorption wavelengths. Ocean and surface temperature measurements find the planet continues to accumulate heat. This gives a line of empirical evidence that human CO2 emissions are causing global warming.

http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2009/09/25/papers-on-laboratory-measurements-of-co2-absorption-properties/

The 99% of scientists figure stated above is complete BS. Many, many scientists (more each day it seems) are backing away from the major claims. I don't need more, heavier regulation on things when there are no viable alternatives offered.

There is more of a consensus today than there EVER has been. Fact. And when the GOP stops blocking every attempt to regulate industry and help curtain CO2 production? Republicans also block legislation calling for investment in clean air technology.

A survey of all peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject 'global climate change' published between 1993 and 2003 shows that not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused (Oreskes 2004).

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full#

Dude, you're just completely ignorant fact and science here.

http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf

[Memorex]

There is smog. There is pollution. All of which means we as the human race should strive every year to create better methods of living. We cannot have an attitude that our actions have zero affect.

Agreed 100%. We should all be doing what's best.

I have over the years took a closer look at things, followed the money, looked at both sides and I honestly feel that anyone that truly believes the human race can tilt this planets eco system to the brink of disaster - to all the horrible ways we are going to die - is simply holding a position that they simply don't want to give up. There has been no significant warming in the past 10 or so years, despite bigger cars, more people, more energy consumption, etc.

If this is your position, you're simply deliberately ignoring all the facts and data.

Different reports show that, overall, 2005 was hotter than 1998. What's more, globally, the hottest 12-month period ever recorded was from June 2009 to May 2010.

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009JD012105.shtml

Again, that doesn't mean the planet itself won't regulate. All things in nature change. This planet has gone through tremendous changes. And if the sea rises, we will move. We may lose cities and islands, but guess what - thousands of years ago those cities and islands were likely under water. I seriously doubt that cavemen built enough fires to create global climate change.

After remaining relatively steady for the last 650,000 years or more, in just the last two hundred years the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has suddenly shot up from 280, to more than 380 parts per million.

Even at my most zealot, I never believed in the worst of it. I know the sun has far more power than we will ever hold.

Again, this is irrelevant to the climate change trend.

Direct observations find that CO2 is rising sharply due to human activity. Satellite and surface measurements find less energy is escaping to space at CO2 absorption wavelengths. Ocean and surface temperature measurements find the planet continues to accumulate heat. This gives a line of empirical evidence that human CO2 emissions are causing global warming.

http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2009/09/25/papers-on-laboratory-measurements-of-co2-absorption-properties/

The 99% of scientists figure stated above is complete BS. Many, many scientists (more each day it seems) are backing away from the major claims. I don't need more, heavier regulation on things when there are no viable alternatives offered.

There is more of a consensus today than there EVER has been. Fact. And when the GOP stops blocking every attempt to regulate industry and help curtain CO2 production? Republicans also block legislation calling for investment in clean air technology.

A survey of all peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject 'global climate change' published between 1993 and 2003 shows that not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused (Oreskes 2004).

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full#

Dude, you're just completely ignorant fact and science here.

http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf

Damn. I wonder what caused all of this: http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/2005-08-18/dioxide.htm Must have been Dino-Gas.

Given that the late Ordovician suffered an ice age (with associated mass extinction) while atmospheric CO2 levels were more than 4,000ppm higher than those of today (yes, that's a full order of magnitude higher), levels at which current 'guesstimations' of climate sensitivity to atmospheric CO2 suggest every last skerrick of ice should have been melted off the planet, we admit significant scepticism over simplistic claims of small increment in atmospheric CO2 equating to toasted planet. Granted, continental configuration now is nothing like it was then, Sol's irradiance differs, as do orbits, obliquity, etc., etc. but there is no obvious correlation between atmospheric CO2 and planetary temperature over the last 600 million years, so why would such relatively tiny amounts suddenly become a critical factor now?

Back to work (yes on a Sunday). I truly believe people are arguing a political argument and not a realistic way of looking at the world. I won't change your mind and I won't try. I won't insult you. But I will certainly say I am not ignorant to facts. I'd like to see you fairly link to as many articles as you can find on the politics of this, the money, etc. Linkt o the articles about how the ice shelf has regenerated. Link to articles about how we have cooled somewhat for the last few years. Link to the scientists that have changed their mind. Give them credit. The difference between this "crowd of death" and me is that I am not spiritually tied to some belief. It's a beautiful evening outside. Was a long cold winter here and I will just enjoy what I have. Reminds me of an evening back when I was 12 or so.

By the way - I am praying for that warmer ocean. last time I was at Zuma, just like when I was a kid, that water was damn cold. It could use about a 25 degree warm up.

[Memorex]

Article from 2007. If these folks are ignorant to the facts, I guess I am in some good company.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=927b9303-802a-23ad-494b-dccb00b51a12

[Memorex]

One more thing - why this all bugs me. And I am being serious here.

Watch two people discuss Climate Change. Watch the passion. And often if two people disagree, it breaks down into one (or both) seeing the other as stupid or ignorant. I know people that won't even talk to people if they think they are a Denier. Ok. Just take a moment to imagine where we are at as a country with this topic.

Now tell me, how has Climate Change affected you personally? How has your daily routine changed. What city is under water? What suffrage exists today that didn't when we were kids? Ok. So no atter how one feels, a wave is not coming to get you tonight (at least no more chance of it than there was when you were a kid).

Now turn your focus for a second, if you can, to the following subjects.
Child abuse
Elder abuse
Gas prices
Homelessness
Mental illness
Unemployment

Those things - in one way or another - have affected me at various points of my life. Now imagine two people discussing those topics. I don;t see the same passion. I don't see the same drive. Yes, there are many people passionate about it, many people that help, etc. But why in the hell would we tax energy and gas and all that when it hurts the poor the most? I'm saying, have a damn good reason. A proven reason. I wish people put as much energy in to the list above as they do this climate change argument. I wish the world was as passionate. I feel like it's become a distraction from real problems happening now.

Katrina - What are your thoughts on Katrina? You think maybe climate change created a bigger storm? You think maybe George Bush was an asshole for flying over? People get really, really passionate about those things. Me, I think about how many people were living in such poor conditions in the first place and how little resources they had to carry on. Isn't that the lesson? We cry for people who live like that, but don't mind shoving gas prices up to 4 or 5 bucks to force people to drive less. It's those same people that now can't get to work, can't heat their homes. Can't go on a damn vacation.

That's why I am irritated with all the climate change BS.

[Seven Wishes2]

Wow. Whatever. Just go on your merry way and blithely ignore fact.

Arctic sea ice has been steadily thinning, even in the last few years while the surface ice (eg - sea ice extent) increased slightly. Consequently, the total amount of Arctic sea ice in 2008 and 2009 are the lowest on record.

http://soa.arcus.org/sites/soa.arcus.org/files/sessions/1-1-advances-understanding-arctic-system-components/pdf/1-1-7-maslowski-wieslaw.pdf

Greenland and Antarctica experienced the highest recorded melt rate since monitoring began in 1958 with a melt area that was also the highest on record since monitoring begin in 1978. The rate of area loss in marine-terminating glaciers was also calculated to be the greatest on record with 417 km2 of glacier ice being lost.

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard/

Various independent measurements of solar activity all confirm the sun has shown a slight cooling trend since 1978.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&A...467..335K

And, to conclude, the ARTICLE you posted was not peer-reviewed. Not one of those scientists is a peer-reviewed climatologist. 'Nuff said. Move along.

[Memorex]

Wow. Whatever. Just go on your merry way and blithely ignore fact.

Arctic sea ice has been steadily thinning, even in the last few years while the surface ice (eg - sea ice extent) increased slightly. Consequently, the total amount of Arctic sea ice in 2008 and 2009 are the lowest on record.

http://soa.arcus.org/sites/soa.arcus.org/files/sessions/1-1-advances-understanding-arctic-system-components/pdf/1-1-7-maslowski-wieslaw.pdf

Greenland and Antarctica experienced the highest recorded melt rate since monitoring began in 1958 with a melt area that was also the highest on record since monitoring begin in 1978. The rate of area loss in marine-terminating glaciers was also calculated to be the greatest on record with 417 km2 of glacier ice being lost.

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard/

Various independent measurements of solar activity all confirm the sun has shown a slight cooling trend since 1978.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&A...467..335K

And, to conclude, the ARTICLE you posted was not peer-reviewed. Not one of those scientists is a peer-reviewed climatologist. 'Nuff said. Move along.

Oh my God! That all sounds horrifying!!! What happened? I mean, all the news people must have drowned because I didn't see the reports of what damage and death it caused.

I have no problem if mother earth wants to raise the oceans a little. Any one that thinks we can build our cities on the waters edge and remain there forever is silly. Water will rise and fall. Period. Does that actually shock anyone?

I remember two articles very near each other - one that said global warming caused an increase in fog in San Francisco and one that said it caused the decrease in fog. My only thought was how does one know what the right level of fog is? Why do we have to live in averages? The universe does not work that way. Last year, winter was 4 months here in Minnesota. I mean real winter. No snow in March. This year, 7 months plus snow in May! It just is.

And by the way, earth will adapt. Humans may die, but earth will be just fine. The planet will be whatever it ends up being.

[Memorex]

Kind of an interesting read:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_july_09.pdf

[Seven Wishes2]

Wrong again! Monckton has been COMPLETELY and THOROUGHLY debunked.

Care to read?

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Monckton_Myths_arg.htm

Climate myths by Monckton vs. What the Science Says (Usage)
"Climate sensitivity is low" Net positive feedback is confirmed by many different lines of evidence. 13
"Sea level rise predictions are exaggerated" Sea level rise is now increasing faster than predicted due to unexpectedly rapid ice melting. 11
"Hockey stick is broken" Recent studies agree that recent global temperatures are unprecedented in the last 1000 years. 9
"Medieval Warm Period was warmer" Globally averaged temperature now is higher than global temperature in medieval times. 9
"It's cooling" The last decade 2000-2009 was the hottest on record. 8
"Sea level rise is exaggerated" A variety of different measurements find steadily rising sea levels over the past century. 8
"CO2 limits will harm the economy"
The benefits of a price on carbon outweigh the costs several times over. 7
"IPCC overestimate temperature rise" Monckton used the IPCC equation in an inappropriate manner. 7
"Models are unreliable" Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean. 6
"Arctic sea ice loss is matched by Antarctic sea ice gain" Arctic sea ice loss is three times greater than Antarctic sea ice gain. 6
"There's no tropospheric hot spot" We see a clear "short-term hot spot" - there's various evidence for a "long-term hot spot". 6
"It warmed just as fast in 1860-1880 and 1910-1940" The warming trend over 1970 to 2001 is greater than warming from both 1860 to 1880 and 1910 to 1940. 6
"Hurricanes aren't linked to global warming" There is increasing evidence that hurricanes are getting stronger due to global warming. 6
"Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming" Extreme weather events are being made more frequent and worse by global warming. 5
"Lindzen and Choi find low climate sensitivity" Lindzen and Choi’s paper is viewed as unacceptably flawed by other climate scientists. 5
"IPCC is alarmist" The IPCC summarizes the recent research by leading scientific experts. 5
"Arctic was warmer in 1940"
The actual data show high northern latitudes are warmer today than in 1940. 5
"Greenland is gaining ice" Greenland on the whole is losing ice, as confirmed by satellite measurement. 5
"Climate's changed before" Climate reacts to whatever forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant forcing. 5

"Oceans are cooling" The most recent ocean measurements show consistent warming. 4
"It hasn't warmed since 1998" For global records, 2010 is the hottest year on record, tied with 2005. 4
"It's not bad" Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health & environment far outweigh any positives. 4
"An exponential increase in CO2 will result in a linear increase in temperature" CO2 levels are rising so fast that unless we decrease emissions, global warming will accelerate this century. 4
"It's the sun" In the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been going in opposite directions 4
"Arctic icemelt is a natural cycle" Thick arctic sea ice is undergoing a rapid retreat. 4
"Al Gore got it wrong" Al Gore book is quite accurate, and far more accurate than contrarian books. 3
"Climategate CRU emails suggest conspiracy" A number of investigations have cleared scientists of any wrongdoing in the media-hyped email incident. 3
"There's no empirical evidence" There are multiple lines of direct observations that humans are causing global warming. 3
"Temp record is unreliable" The warming trend is the same in rural and urban areas, measured by thermometers and satellites. 3
"It warmed before 1940 when CO2 was low" Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2. 3
"Mt. Kilimanjaro's ice loss is due to land use" Most glaciers are in rapid retreat worldwide, notwithstanding a few complicated cases. 3
"Earth hasn't warmed as much as expected" This argument ignores the cooling effect of aerosols and the planet's thermal inertia. 3
"There's no correlation between CO2 and temperature" There is long-term correlation between CO2 and global temperature; other effects are short-term. 3
"Greenland was green" Other parts of the earth got colder when Greenland got warmer. 3
"Skeptics were kept out of the IPCC?" Official records, Editors and emails suggest CRU scientists acted in the spirit if not the letter of IPCC rules. 2
"Polar bear numbers are increasing" Polar bears are in danger of extinction as well as many other species. 2
"Greenland ice sheet won't collapse" When Greenland was 3 to 5 degrees C warmer than today, a large portion of the Ice Sheet melted. 2
"IPCC were wrong about Himalayan glaciers"
Glaciers are in rapid retreat worldwide, despite 1 error in 1 paragraph in a 1000 page IPCC report. 2
"Antarctica is gaining ice" Satellites measure Antarctica losing land ice at an accelerating rate. 2
"2009-2010 winter saw record cold spells" A cold day in Chicago in winter has nothing to do with the trend of global warming. 2
"Hansen's 1988 prediction was wrong" Jim Hansen had several possible scenarios; his mid-level scenario B was right. 2
"It's Urban Heat Island effect" Urban and rural regions show the same warming trend. 2
"CO2 limits will hurt the poor"
Those who contribute the least greenhouse gases will be most impacted by climate change. 2
"Ocean acidification isn't serious"
Past history shows that when CO2 rises quickly, there was mass extinctions of coral reefs. 2
"Arctic sea ice has recovered" Thick arctic sea ice is in rapid retreat. 2
"CO2 was higher in the past" When CO2 was higher in the past, the sun was cooler. 2
"We're coming out of the Little Ice Age"
Scientists have determined that the factors which caused the Little Ice Age cooling are not currently causing global warming 2
"Phil Jones says no global warming since 1995" Phil Jones was misquoted. 2
"Global warming stopped in 1998, 1995, 2002, 2007, 2010, ????"
Global temperature is still rising and 2010 was the hottest recorded. 2
"Satellites show no warming in the troposphere" The most recent satellite data show that the earth as a whole is warming. 1
"It's microsite influences" Microsite influences on temperature changes are minimal; good and bad sites show the same trend. 1
"Record high snow cover was set in winter 2008/2009" Winter snow cover in 2008/2009 was average while the long-term trend in spring, summer, and annual snow cover is rapid decline. 1
"Corals are resilient to bleaching" Globally about 1% of coral is dying out each year. 1
"CO2 is not a pollutant"
Through its impacts on the climate, CO2 presents a danger to public health and welfare, and thus qualifies as an air pollutant 1
"CO2 has a short residence time" Excess CO2 from human emissions has a long residence time of over 100 years 1
"Glaciers are growing" Most glaciers are retreating, posing a serious problem for millions who rely on glaciers for water. 1
"Ice Sheet losses are overestimated" A number of independent measurements find extensive ice loss from Antarctica and Greenland. 1
"Ice age predicted in the 70s" The vast majority of climate papers in the 1970s predicted warming. 1
"Peer review process was corrupted" An Independent Review concluded that CRU's actions were normal and didn't threaten the integrity of peer review. 1
"CO2 is plant food" The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors 1
"It's not urgent"
A large amount of warming is delayed, and if we don’t act now we could pass tipping points. 1
"It's not us" Multiple sets of independent observations find a human fingerprint on climate change. 1
"Greenland has only lost a tiny fraction of its ice mass" Greenland's ice loss is accelerating & will add metres of sea level rise in upcoming centuries. 1
"Climate is chaotic and cannot be predicted" Weather is chaotic but climate is driven by Earth's energy imbalance, which is more predictable. 1
"It's freaking cold!" A local cold day has nothing to do with the long-term trend of increasing global temperatures. 1
"There is no consensus" 97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming. 1
"Over 31,000 scientists signed the OISM Petition Project" The 'OISM petition' was signed by only a few climatologists. 1
"It's too hard" Scientific studies have determined that current technology is sufficient to reduce greenhouse gas emissions enough to avoid dangerous climate change. 1
"Scientists tried to 'hide the decline' in global temperature" The 'decline' refers to a decline in northern tree-rings, not global temperature, and is openly discussed in papers and the IPCC reports. 1
"CRU tampered with temperature data" An independent inquiry went back to primary data sources and were able to replicate CRU's results. 1
"Southern sea ice is increasing" Antarctic sea ice has grown in recent decades despite the Southern Ocean warming at the same time. 1
"Animals and plants can adapt" Global warming will cause mass extinctions of species that cannot adapt on short time scales. 1
"Sea level is not rising" The claim sea level isn’t rising is based on blatantly doctored graphs contradicted by observations.